Tsarion: EXPOSED! Another ridiculous attempt to hijack truth by New Age BS

[carlee]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UV1lh1tEbw&feature=channel


[NOTE: The Original Title by Carlee was: "Michael Tsarion - Declaration Deception" which can easily be seen by going to the link. But since it was debunked as nonsensical NLP whispering of boogie boogie boogie distortions, the title has been updated following the annual Iron Mountain mod meeting to reflect reality.]

[carlee]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIhMn3_glpA&feature=channel   part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UV1lh1tEbw&feature=channel  part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDe_a2T9ur0&feature=channel part 3

[Freeski]

bump for later - thanks

[citizenx]

Wait, you mean Franklin and Jefferson were Illuminati or something?

(That still doesn't mean they were entirely bad guys, IMO. And the revolution staged or not might have done some good.  Lest we forget it was a slave republic that was created -- like Athens or Rome.)

OK, come and get me. I've got broad shoulders.

Post deleted in 1...2...3

Say, how many people know what the name of that town was before they changed it to Washington?

[citizenx]

ROME

Rome, Maryland.

[citizenx]

Look into it farther.  The parallels are uncanny.  Connections between D.C., London, and Rome (including "Il Vaticano").

[lord edward coke]

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=180117.msg1066459#msg1066459

Posion well;  they feed a little truth to a shill ,thereby herding the truthseeker into believing the other
crap he is shoveling.

Plus if you are already aware of his  faliures , it discredits the lil bit of truth he has finally
 realised.     http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=152636.40

[EvadingGrid]

ROME

Rome, Maryland.

They even called the river Tiber

[Xill]

bump!!!

Michael is completely correct! In the past I've said that the revolution was staged in order to give people a false sense of independence. The "founders" are not who we've been led to believe.  

BTW. It's amazing how I've heard the intro song hundreds of times in the past 15 or so years and it STILL has new meanings.

False sense of independence?

I strongly disagree, thinking that the declaration of human rights is part of a massive conspiracy to subjugate the people is a seriously distorted view of reality. The world is not in black in white; it's not just a question of elites vs the people.

Time to stop listening to simple-minded logic on internet from non-credible sources like Tiarson and learn the real history at your local library.

[citizenx]

The United  States Remains A British Colony:

http://www.moneyteachers.org/British.Colony.html

Found on today's Rense homepage.

[nowhere to run]

Check out this video:

Michael Tsarion Debunked 2009



Click here to watch or download for free:
http://conspiracyclothes.com/nowheretorun/?page_id=217

[Freeski]

Who knows what to believe?

[citizenx]

"USA Remains a British Colony"

Part 2 from Moneyteachers:

http://www.moneyteachers.org/British.Colony2.html

[Freeski]

Do we really need a piece of paper (any piece of paper) to tell us we're free people, to establish our freedom? The whole "idea of America" was just that, an idea! Fuck the paperwork! We ARE FREE!!!

[citizenx]

OZ, NZ and CANADA not really free either.  A kind of trick to get more votes in the League of Nations and UN:

http://www.henrymakow.com/oz_new_zealand_canadian_consti.html

[Freeski]

OZ, NZ and CANADA not really free either.  A kind of trick to get more votes in the League of Nations and UN:

http://www.henrymakow.com/oz_new_zealand_canadian_consti.html

You're damn right we're not free!

But just last week, my admittedly socialist brother in law outright said to me that he doesn't want "freedom". He's good with it all.

I kid you not.

[Dok]

You're damn right we're not free!

But just last week, my admittedly socialist brother in law outright said to me that he doesn't want "freedom". He's good with it all.

I kid you not.

I hear that all the time from co-workers. Drives me nuts. Its always, "i dont have anything to hide. Ill give up some freedom. "

Well when you give up the dinner roll when does it stop?

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=181346.0;topicseen

[citizenx]

You're also right.  We don't really need their damn piece of paper either.

"I smell a rat."
Patrick Henry speaking of the "Constitutional Convention" (really supposed to be a committee working to ammend the "Articles of Confederation" at the time)

[Freeski]

So what the hell do we do?

[citizenx]

I think it's high time the whole English-speaking world had a "lynching" of our would-be Kraut superiors*. (After a "fair trial" of course.)

That's one idea.


*the "House of Windsor (Hanover/Saxe-Coburg-Gotha)"

If anybody wants to know what a "lynching" is, it has an interesting history -- going back to its invention by the British aristocracy. Karma.

[Freeski]

HOW THE FUCK DO WE BREAK THE SPELL?

[phosphene]

Do we really need a piece of paper (any piece of paper) to tell us we're free people, to establish our freedom?

No, you need a piece of paper to tell OTHER people that you are free. Have you written one yet? Or are you cheering for one written by some other guy?

[citizenx]

Freeski,

Well, if I were a citizen of Australia, New Zealand or Canada, I would start by publicly burning the Union Jack to get people's attention.

It is going to be much harder to get Americans to wake up and realize they've been had.

We don't need a new "Tea Party", we need a new "Whiskey Rebellion".  The leaders of that "rebellion" knew what was up!

Willie Nelson could supply the theme song.  "Whiskey River" comes to mind.

Phosphene,

Why kill trees?  I am free.  I am saying so right here. It is the twenty-first century, n'est-ce-pas?

[Freeski]

No, you need a piece of paper to tell OTHER people that you are free. Have you written one yet? Or are you cheering for one written by some other guy?

Who says I have to write one?

[citizenx]

If you have to write one, you are already not free.

[Freeski]

If you have to write one, you are already not free.

Exactly,

[phosphene]

Why kill trees?  I am free.  I am saying so right here. It is the twenty-first century, n'est-ce-pas?

if you wanna declare your freedom, honor tradition, the spirit of the founding fathers, and save trees, you could write your own declaration of independence on hemp paper.

_.oO

[JT Coyoté]

bump!!!

Michael is completely correct! In the past I've said that the revolution was staged in order to give people a false sense of independence. The "founders" are not who we've been led to believe.  

BTW. It's amazing how I've heard the intro song hundreds of times in the past 15 or so years and it STILL has new meanings.

Hate to have to tell you this but you have been misinformed and misled about the founding fathers. Also, the idea of an organized global resistance with leaders and generals and lieutenants and the like, using an anarchist/neo-marxist model is the act of becoming merely the new global left, against the already existing and powerful Global elite right, it's a divisive trap... It creates a new manipulative left/right paradigm that can easily be commandeered and controlled by the highest bidder.

 Alternatively, 150 nations and 6.5 billion people following the LIBERTY model within their own national political sphere without top down regulation but by the upward moving power of each individual exercising the rights granted by Providence at birth and protected here by the 9th and 10th Amendments, this cannot be easily bought off.

The disinformation against the founders and the Liberty based American system is reaching a crescendo now.  The agents of this disinformation are poised and beginning to act upon the constitutional ignorance of the 2 generations of Americans since the Kennedy assassination and coup, who were schooled only in the European paradigm as it relates to the American system and not our American Constitutional system itself.

Oldyoti

"If ever time should come, when vain and
aspiring men shall possess the highest seats
in Government, our country will stand in need
of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
~Samuel Adams

[Dig]

The NWO plan is actually to have people question the constitution. Whether you know it or not, your inability to actually read anything in this thread gives the power to the NWO agenda. They do the same exact thing in every other country they ravage. Their first priority is to have people feel that the foundation of their country is going to disappear. They do this by causing infirghting and questioning and then eventually with apathy.

I am surprised that some are still so ignorant of this as it has been written for decades even centuries...

Cass Sunstein: Conspiracy Theories; Causes and Cures

The entire document read in text-to-speech. Not sure how useful this is for people, but here it is anyways.
http://www.archive.org/details/CassSunstein
Cass Sunstein_Conspiracy Theories pt 1 download mp3
Cass Sunstein_Conspiracy Theories pt 2 download mp3

Behavioral engineering - from Skinner to 'Nudge' Sunstein to David Brin
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=178266.0

Top Obama Czar Sunstein: Mein Kampf II: THE PLAN TO EXTERMINATE NWO OPPOSITION
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=155434.0

Top Obama czar:
Infiltrate all 'conspiracy theorists'
Presidential adviser wrote about crackdown on expressing opinions
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121884

In a lengthy academic paper, President Obama's regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban "conspiracy theorizing." Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud. Sunstein also recommended the government send agents to infiltrate "extremists who supply conspiracy theories" to disrupt the efforts of the "extremists" to propagate their theories. In a 2008 Harvard law paper, "Conspiracy Theories," Sunstein and co-author Adrian Vermeule, a Harvard law professor, ask, "What can government do about conspiracy theories?"  

"We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories."

In the 30-page paper – obtained and reviewed by WND – Sunstein argues the best government response to "conspiracy theories" is "cognitive infiltration of extremist groups."

Continued Sunstein: "We suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity."

Sunstein said government agents "might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."

Sunstein defined a conspiracy theory as "an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role."

Some "conspiracy theories" recommended for ban by Sunstein include:

"The theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud."
"The view that the Central Intelligence Agency was responsible for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy."
"The 1996 crash of TWA flight 800 was caused by a U.S. military missile."
"The Trilateral Commission is responsible for important movements of the international economy."
"That Martin Luther King Jr. was killed by federal agents."
"The moon landing was staged and never actually occurred."

Sunstein allowed that "some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true."

He continued: "The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the CIA did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of 'mind control.'” Sunstein's paper advocating against the belief that global warming is a deliberate fraud was written before November's climate scandal in which e-mails hacked from the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K. indicate top climate researchers conspired to rig data and keep researchers with dissenting views from publishing in leading scientific journals.

Sunstein: Ban 'right wing' rumors

Sunstein's paper is not the first time he has advocated banning the free flow of information. WND reported that in a recently released book, "On Rumors," Sunstein argued websites should be obliged to remove "false rumors" while libel laws should be altered to make it easier to sue for spreading such "rumors." In the 2009 book, Sunstein cited as a primary example of "absurd" and "hateful" remarks, reports by "right-wing websites" alleging an association between President Obama and Weatherman terrorist William Ayers. He also singled out radio talker Sean Hannity for "attacking" Obama regarding the president's "alleged associations." Ayers became a name in the 2008 presidential campaign when it was disclosed he worked closely with Obama for years. Obama also was said to have launched his political career at a 1995 fundraiser in Ayers' apartment.

'New Deal Fairness Doctrine'

WND also previously reported Sunstein drew up a "First Amendment New Deal" – a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would include the establishment of a panel of "nonpartisan experts" to ensure "diversity of view" on the airwaves. Sunstein compared the need for the government to regulate broadcasting to the moral obligation the U.S. had to impose new rules that outlawed segregation.

Sunstein's radical proposal, set forth in his 1993 book "The Partial Constitution," received no news media attention and scant scrutiny until the WND report.  In the book, Sunstein outwardly favors and promotes the "Fairness Doctrine," the abolished FCC policy that required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance in a manner the government deemed "equitable and balanced."  Sunstein introduces what he terms his "First Amendment New Deal" to regulate broadcasting in the U.S. His proposal, which focuses largely on television, includes a government requirement that "purely commercial stations provide financial subsidies to public television or to commercial stations that agree to provide less profitable but high-quality programming."

Sunstein wrote it is "worthwhile to consider more dramatic approaches as well."  He proposes "compulsory public-affairs programming, right of reply, content review by nonpartisan experts or guidelines to encourage attention to public issues and diversity of view."  The Obama czar argues his regulation proposals for broadcasting are actually presented within the spirit of the Constitution.  "It seems quite possible that a law that contained regulatory remedies would promote rather than undermine the 'freedom of speech,'" he writes.

Writes Sunstein: "The idea that government should be neutral among all forms of speech seems right in the abstract, but as frequently applied it is no more plausible than the idea that it should be neutral between the associational interests of blacks and those of whites under conditions of segregation." Sunstein contends the landmark case that brought about the Fairness Doctrine, Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, "stresses not the autonomy of broadcasters (made possible only by current ownership rights), but instead the need to promote democratic self-government by ensuring that people are presented with a broad range of views about public issues."

He continues: "In a market system, this goal may be compromised. It is hardly clear that 'the freedom of speech' is promoted by a regime in which people are permitted to speak only if other people are willing to pay enough to allow them to be heard."  In his book, Sunstein slams the U.S. courts' unwillingness to "require something like a Fairness Doctrine" to be a result of "the judiciary's lack of democratic pedigree, lack of fact-finding powers and limited remedial authority." He clarifies he is not arguing the government should be free to regulate broadcasting however it chooses. "Regulation designed to eliminate a particular viewpoint would of course be out of bounds. All viewpoint discrimination would be banned," Sunstein writes.  But, he says, "at the very least, regulative 'fairness doctrines' would raise no real doubts" constitutionally.

Just so we are all clear who the enemy is and how they operate...


"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." -Sun Tzu

"To keep people everywhere from deciding their own destinies by means of one created crisis after another and then “managing” such crises. This will confuse and demoralize the population to the extent where faced with too many choices, apathy on a massive scale will result. In the case of the United States, an agency for crisis management is already in place. It is called the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), whose existence I first disclosed in 1980. There will be more on FEMA as we proceed." -John Coleman Committee of 300 http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_committee300_02.htm

Levin was the author of a work entitled “Time Perspective and Morale” which is a Club of Rome publication concerning how to break down the morale of nations and individual leaders.

Here is an extract of the document:

“One of the main techniques for breaking morale through a strategy of terror consists in exactly this tactic: keep the person hazy as to where he stands and just what he may expect. In addition, if frequent vacillations between severe disciplinary measures and promise of good treatment together with the spreading of contradictory news make the structure of the situation unclear, then the individual may cease to know whether a particular plan would lead toward or away from his goal.

Under these conditions, even those individuals who have definite goals and are ready to take risks are paralyzed by the severe inner conflict in regard to what to do.”

This Club of Rome blueprint applies to COUNTRIES as well as to individuals, particularly the government leaders of those countries. We in the U.S. need not think that “Oh well, this is America, and those kinds of things just do not happen here.” Let me assure you that they ARE happening in the U.S., and perhaps more so than in any other country.

The Levin-Club of Rome plan is designed to demoralize us all so that in the end we feel we should follow whatever it is that is planned for us. We WILL follow Club of Rome orders like sheep. Any seemingly strong leader who SUDDENLY APPEARS to “rescue” the nation must be regarded with the utmost suspicion. Remember that Khomeini was groomed for years by British intelligence, especially during his time in Paris, before he suddenly appeared as the savior of Iran. Boris Yeltsin is from the same M16-SIS stable.

The Club of Rome feels confident that it has carried out it Committee of 300 mandate to “soften up” the United States. After 45 years of waging war on the people of this nation, who will doubt that it has indeed accomplished its task? Look around and see how we have been demoralized.

[...]

With the U.S. spiritually, morally bankrupted, with our industrial base destroyed throwing 30 million people out of work with our big cities ghastly cesspools of every imaginable crime with a murder rate almost three times higher than any other country, with 4 million homeless, with corruption in government reaching endemic proportions, who will gainsay that the United States is ready to collapse from within, into the waiting arms of the New Dark Age One World Government?

[...]

We as a nation are ready to accept the demise of the United States of America and the American way of life, once the envy of the entire world.
 
Do not think this has happened on its own— the old “times are changing” syndrome. Time does not change anything, PEOPLE do.

Hey Tavistock...I got your apathy right here you pieces of psychopathic crapola!  

The goal is for us to turn on the constitution and the constitutional government.

Watch the movie Secret of Oz, it exposes the plan that the banksters have to question out government, our constitution in a planned "anarchist" way rather than a reinforcement of the legitimate constitution.

It exposes that once the NWO can get a country to give up on its government completely, then they can really start raaveaging her. The government is there to protect us from these banksters and the constitution does just that with the issuance of money being a government priority (like national defense). But when a private group usurps that power, then we have what we have now.

Proposing to change the constitution while the country is so vulnerable to bankster vultures and their teams of economic hit men seems highly counter productive to me.

[citizenx]

The NWO plan is actually to have people question the constitution.

Don't just question the constitution.  Question everything.

The truth will out.


Again:

Patrick Henry, "I smell a rat."

By questioning it, you can see its good and its bad, you come to truly own it -- make it yours, warts and all.

If God had written it, slaves would not have been enumerated as fractional people, and they would have been free and had the vote.

Nobody and nothing is perfect.

Nobody around here least-wise.

[JT Coyoté]

Don't just question the constitution.  Question everything.

The truth will out.


Again:

Patrick Henry, "I smell a rat."

By questioning it, you can see its good and its bad, you come to truly own it -- make it yours, warts and all.

If God had written it, slaves would not have been enumerated as fractional people, and they would have been free and had the vote.

Nobody and nothing is perfect.

Nobody around here least-wise.

Your pronouncement here more than includes you, of course... Only by reading it and its context can you understand it and make it yours. which will end all of your questions once understood. Questions just for the sake of questioning is like watering unseeded ground expecting a crop to grow.  

Your fractional comment which you say regards slaves, is really a NWO floated urban legend... a fallacy spread by the unknowing.

The 3/5ths persons in Article I Sec. 2 Clause 3, is for the Indians who are free on the land and are not to be taxed, at all, by any state or the federal power... yet in the census to be taken every 10 years, they will still be counted, at a 3/5ths rate for purposes of representation. Nowhere in the constitution is any individual stated to be anything other a whole in standing!

This all shows that you haven't read the Constitution or haven't understood it if you did. Nor have you wondered to glance at the debates that were engaged in that surround it and give it context, the very reasons for it in the first place...

It will take more study than just a few hours of condensed and skewed BS on the History Channel to get you there, that's for sure!

These things were still taught when I was in school through the '50s and early '60s every clause was studied as were the supporting documents. It was called American government, and 9 weeks was spent on the Constitution and Bill of Rights alone. It was a solid non-elective class in 8th grade, and there was a follow up elective class, in high school.

JTCoyoté

"The real man smiles in trouble, gathers strength
from distress, and grows brave by reflection."
~Thomas Paine  

  

[citizenx]

So, black slaves (and women, and men who didn't own land) had the vote, too?

Where are you coming from, JT?

Was this document the product of the "Holy Spirit" for you?  Infallible, like the pope is to the Romanists?  Come on.

Take off the rose-colored glasses.

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

Who is it that is not reading it correctly?

[phosphene]

These things were still taught when I was in school through the '50s and early '60s every clause was studied as were the supporting documents. It was called American government, and 9 weeks was spent on the Constitution and Bill of Rights alone. It was a solid non-elective class in 8th grade, and there was a follow up elective class, in high school.

Is the public school system really a good place to learn about the US constitution? Or is it an NWO indoctrination factory?  Can't have it both ways.

[JT Coyoté]

So, black slaves (and women, and men who didn't own land) had the vote, too?

Where are you coming from, JT?

Was this document the product of the "Holy Spirit" for you?  Infallible, like the pope is to the Romanists?  Come on.

Take off the rose-colored glasses.

Each state set there own voting parameters... for the first 100 years the feds had no such power... Remember, this is a republic not a Democracy. In states where land ownership, and business ownership and other criteria were set as criterion to vote... met those specs, included women and those of color could vote... some states allowed all folks over a certain age to participate, some only property owners could vote. Each state was different, because they were free states working within the guidelines set by the agreement between these states in the Constitution.

And the last three lines you typed are a complete non sequitor...  

Oldyoti

"When we are planning for posterity, we ought
to remember that virtue is not hereditary."
 ~Thomas Paine

 

[JT Coyoté]

Is the public school system really a good place to learn about the US constitution? Or is it an NWO indoctrination factory?  Can't have it both ways.

They were local schools then... especially here in the West...

When the NWO and the FEDs and the NEA showed up and comandeered the schools and set the socialist agenda as the prime directive in the early '70s, that is when you got the crapola you grew up on...

I'm here attempting to break that indoctrination and shine a little truth your way.

JTCoyoté

"Such is the irresistible nature of truth
that all it asks, and all it wants, is the
liberty of appearing."
~Thomas Paine

[citizenx]

In states where land ownership, and business ownership and other criteria were set as criterion to vote... met those specs, included women and those of color could vote... some states allowed all folks over a certain age to participate, some only property owners could vote.

And that's OK with you?

What if states chose to do that again today?

If it wasn't a flaw in the original document, why did it have to be ammended?

(In fairness to the constitution, it did at least allow itself to be so ammended.  A great document, but not perfect.)

[JT Coyoté]

So, black slaves (and women, and men who didn't own land) had the vote, too?

Where are you coming from, JT?

Was this document the product of the "Holy Spirit" for you?  Infallible, like the pope is to the Romanists?  Come on.

Take off the rose-colored glasses.

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

Who is it that is not reading it correctly?

YOU!

This clause is for this purpose..."Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union,..."... and this is a phrase broken by a comma, not just the word "excluding"... "..., and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of ALL other persons." Which means what it says, [at] 3/5th of all other persons.

What you need is many hours of reading the debates on these clauses over and over again... and maybe an English Grammer course as well.

JTCoyoté

''...on every question of construction [of the Constitution], let us carry
ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the
spirit manifested in the Debates, & instead of trying what meaning may be
squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one
in which it was passed.'' ~Thomas Jefferson

[citizenx]

Former PH.D. candidate in English.  Master's degree in English.  Former college and university English instructor.  High school and junior high school English instructor.  Instructor at several S.A.T., A.C.T., and P.S.A.T. preaparation academies.  All-but-dissertation toward Ph.D.

Excluding refers to the "Indians" (not taxed) who were not counted at all, not as 3/5 of a person.

For people unfamiliar with the three-fifths compromise:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

I might suggest, what you need is a U.S. constitution refresher course for people educated in the Cold War propaganda era.

And it's "grammar", not "grammer" (sic).

[JT Coyoté]

Former PH.D. candidate in English.  Master's degree in English.  Former college and university English instructor.  High school and junior high school English instructor.  Instructor at several S.A.T., A.C.T., and P.S.A.T. preaparation academies.  All-but-dissertation toward Ph.D.

Excluding refers to the "Indians" (not taxed) who were not counted at all, not as 3/5 of a person.

For people unfamiliar with the three-fifths compromise:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

I might suggest, what you need is a U.S. constitution refresher course for people educated in the Cold War propaganda era.

And it's "grammar", not "grammer" (sic).

Good Job Citizenx... You're never too old to learn...

So does that mean that because Lincoln's 13th amendment made it to where no man could own another, and the 14th made it to where the federal government, as "citizens" owns us all from birth, are all of us now only 3/5ths persons?

Following the Civil War and the abolition of slavery by the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (1865), the three-fifths clause was rendered moot. Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (1868) later superseded Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3. It specifically states that "Representatives shall be apportioned ...counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed..."

Oldyoti

"When we are planning for posterity, we ought
to remember that virtue is not hereditary."
 ~Thomas Paine

[citizenx]

Well, the constitution does allow for slavery under certain condition: namely for felons.

So, when they arrest all of us patriots on trumped up charges, we really will be slaves for the coprorate prison-industrial complex, by law.

I don't know how they will enumerate us then, but I am not sure I care.

Anyway, JT, I still think we're on the same side.  As far as our constitution is concerned, flawed or not, it is arguably the greatest ever put together by man -- does that sound like something the NWO would say?  As for me, I definitely don't want to see it abrogated or nullified any time in the near future and find all atttempts on the part of the government to do so repulsive in the extreme.

Like the ship named after it, it is not perfect.  "Old Ironsides" was not really made of iron, but stout oak.  But she is still around today, because people cared for her -- patching parts here, parts there.

As for "old", I just celebrated my forty-fifth trip around Sol, so I'm not feeling very young myself.  But, I too am still learning every day.